Case commentaries – Page 2
-
AnalysisHayward v Zurich Insurance Company plc [2016] UKSC 48
Supreme Court holds that a settlement may be set aside for fraud even if fraud is suspected
-
Analysis
Vilca v Xstrata [2016] EWHC 1824 (QB)
The High Court has held that it has the power to order a party to appoint a separate law firm to conduct an independent re-review of its disclosure on strong grounds, although it chose not to in this case
-
Analysis
Novus Aviation Ltd v Alubaf Arab International Bank BSC [2016] EWHC 1937 (Comm)
Commercial Court rules that the full effect of part 36 was unjust when sterling value had recently fallen against the dollar.
-
Analysis
Webb Resolutions Ltd v Countrywide Surveyors Ltd [2016] Ch Div (4 May 2016)
The court has held a claimant liable for a defendant’s costs of and incidental to an abandoned professional negligence claim, even though the claim form had not been served - good news for defendants aiming to recover costs incurred pre-action?
-
Analysis
Massar [2016] ECJ C-460/14; Buyuktipi [2016] ECJ C-5/15
The ECJ has provided guidance on the proper construction of ‘inquiry’ in article 4(1) of Council Directive 87/344/EEC relating to insureds’ right to choose a lawyer under a legal expenses insurance policy
-
Analysis
Mendes v Hochtief (UK) Construction Ltd [2016] EWHC 976 (QB)
Mr Justice Coulson has ruled that a claimant could recover trial advocacy fees under CPR 45 when a claim settled on the day of the hearing, before the trial was heard
-
Analysis
Bolt Burdon Solicitors v Tariq & Ors [2016] EWHC 811 (QB)
The court upholds a contingency fee agreement whereby the solicitors billed £498,083.52, whereas on a time basis the total would have been around £50,000.00 - an 800 per cent uplift
-
Analysis
Family Mosaic Home Ownership Ltd v Peer Real Estate Ltd [2016] EWHC 257 (Ch)
The High Court has given guidance on the transfer of existing cases to the Shorter Trials Scheme
-
Analysis
Suh v Mace (UK) Ltd [2016] EWCA Civ 4
Court of Appeal rules that litigants in persons can benefit from ‘without prejudice’ rule without knowing what it means
-
Analysis
Sugar Hut Group Ltd v AJ Insurance Service [2016] EWCA Civ 46
What are the costs consequences following the making of part 36 offers? The Court of Appeal overturns a decision on costs and confirms there is no ’near miss’ rule for part 36 offers
-
Analysis
R v Secretary of State for Justice [2016] UKSC 2
The Supreme Court has granted anonymity to a double-murderer. When is it right to keep the names of parties to civil litigation a secret?
-
Analysis
Harlequin Property (SVG) Ltd v Wilkins Kennedy [2015] EWHC 3050 (TCC)
A very wide approach to the inspection of confidential material? The court has ruled that the disclosure of confidential Serious Fraud Office and client documents to dispose fairly of the issues overweighed any public interest in keeping them witheld
-
Analysis
Thevarajah v Riordan [2015] UKSC 78
An important decision from the Supreme Court that has reaffirmed that a party who has failed to obtain relief from sanctions cannot make another application without demonstrating a change in circumstances
-
Analysis
Hallows v Wilson Barca LLP (2015)
This case is only available as a summary on Lawtel at present, but suggests that the duties imposed on public bodies by the Freedom of Information Act 2000 can be relevant to the common law doctrine of legal professional privilege
-
Analysis
Kerins v Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust (unreported, 31 July 2015)
The court considered whether the conduct of the claimant’s solicitors had been unreasonable or improper within the meaning of CPR 44.11, conduct that included the intentional failure to disclose the existence of a CFA
-
Analysis
British Airways plc v Spencer (Trustees of the Airways Pensions Scheme) [2015] EWHC 2477
The High Court considers the meaning and purpose of CPR 35.1, and provides guidance on when expert evidence is ‘reasonably required’
-
Analysis
Central Bank of Ecuador v Conticorp SA [2015] UKPC 11
The Privy Council has reversed findings on dishonesty from the lower courts, and provides a useful reminder in relation to appealing findings of facts
-
Analysis
Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v Sinclair [2015] EWCA Civ 774
Court of Appeal confirms that the principles set out in Mitchell have to be read in the light of Denton
-
Analysis
Begum v Hossain [2015] EWCA Civ 717
This case is an usual case of the court upholding a challenge to an expert determination, and a reminder of the limited grounds on which an expert determination can be challenged
-
Analysis
Nokes v Heart of England Foundation NHS Trust [2015] EWHC B6 (Costs)
In one of the first judgments since the Jackson reforms, Master Leonard has given useful guidance on the extent of recoverability of post-LASPO ATE premiums in medical negligence claims
- Previous Page
- Page1
- Page2
- Page3
- Page4
- Next Page
